Currently, a lot of our articles refer to things released on the Mobile devices as "iOS". This is technically incorrect, since the Android OS, and less well known, Windows Phone OS, also fall under the category of Mobile. I do feel like the "Mobile" name is what we should be defaulting to, when it comes to our parameter names on infoboxes and how they're referred to in articles, since "iOS" is inaccurate. This forum is to propose such a change. However, I do feel like referring to images as "iOS" in their image names is still accurate if the image comes from the iOS version of the game, and otherwise, should probably be referred to as "Android", not that there's any policy on images anyway, but you get my drift. Other than that, I propose not referring to the Mobile appearances as "smartphones", as Android and iOS apps are also played on tablets. The reason I think we didn't use this before other than the fact that only iOS exists was because there are some old Japanese mobile games. For those, I think they can be referred to as "Phone" games. Phone is accurate for those as they're played on nothing else, with Mobile, they are used on any smartphone, tablet and on some random consoles using the Android OS which is a mobile OS at its core anyway. | |||
- I prefer "Smartphones" more than "Mobile". FFIV for the example, has a mobile version (not the smartphone version but it's the 2D port for Japanese mobile phones (this one
). Monterossa (talk) 19:36, September 27, 2014 (UTC)
- "For those, I think they can be referred to as "Phone" games. Phone is accurate for those as they're played on nothing else, with Mobile, they are used on any smartphone, tablet and on some random consoles using the Android OS which is a mobile OS at its core anyway."
- JBed (talk) 19:40, September 27, 2014 (UTC)
Well, I just received a message on my tablet; an update to basically all of my FF games. They are now enabled for Android TV. This means Android is no longer a mobile OS alone. Well, ir already wasnt because of Ouya. But my question is, now what? Android/iOS is all I can think of, but that's a hell of a long title to put for an infobox tab. I genuinely cannot think of a good title for these anymore... | |||
Maybe that's what they call it now, but Ouya, Android TV, and any other developments are making me feel that will no longer be accurate somewhere down the line. We can be safe calling it "Mobile" for the time being, but I'm worried that "time being" won't be long... | |||
I've noticed this for some time now and wasn't sure whether to bring it up, I mean it worked for when they were just on iOS but with that not being the case now we should probably make it a bit clearer. Tia-Lewise
10:53, October 26, 2014 (UTC)
the problem i see lies in how we're classifying support for platforms. because "platforms" can be a hardware or an OS or both, its pretty complicated. the proprietary console ones are straightforward.. but for the smartphones/ouya/android tv i think we should just list by OS as it makes more sense, cos its the "common factor" found between the devices. 1 OS can be used on many devices, and (at least for now, barring exceptions) each device only supports 1 OS. the PC/windows thing is no different right? the platform section of the infobox displays Windows, whereas the release date section will say PC version. in the articles i think we should just refer to the OS platform, since it seems like version differences do not exist within the same OS version? If we have to refer to them as a collective, i guess Android/iOS will have to do--Arciele Spira (talk) 11:13, October 26, 2014 (UTC)